Bug#293179: tetex-bin: Bug in font pcrr7tn with dvips: Backticks wrong

2011-12-16 Thread Hilmar Preusse 
On 01.02.05 Hans baier (hansba...@web.de) wrote:

Hi,

 Package: tetex-bin
 Version: 2.0.2-25
 Severity: important
 
 I use the pslatex package to print Linux Seminar courseware.
 This is heavily dependent on the correct rendering of backticks.
 
 The backticks are rendered correctly if viewed in xdvi
 or PDF generated by pdflatex, whereas they are
 rendered incorrectly when using dvips.
 Alas, I cant switch to pslatex because I would have to convert
 2000+ pages and hundreds of images to pdflatex.
 This bug concerns font pcrr7tn which is used in the pslatex-Style.
 The bold-face variant works fine.
 
I just got the information, that the issue is solved in the latest
release of the URW fonts:

http://bugs.ghostscript.com/show_bug.cgi?id=688022

snip
Chris Liddell 2011-12-15 16:21:08 UTC

I believe this is fixed with the latest URW font release:
http://git.ghostscript.com/?p=ghostpdl.git;a=commit;h=ea9a9517
snip

No, I don't have the chance to test it.

H.
-- 
sigmentation fault


pgpCGjJV5a8tX.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Bug#293179: tetex-bin: Bug in font pcrr7tn with dvips: Backticks wrong

2005-04-25 Thread Hilmar Preusse 
On 01.02.05 Hans baier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:

Hi all,

 I use the pslatex package to print Linux Seminar courseware. This
 is heavily dependent on the correct rendering of backticks.
 
 The backticks are rendered correctly if viewed in xdvi or PDF
 generated by pdflatex, whereas they are rendered incorrectly when
 using dvips.
 Alas, I cant switch to pslatex because I would have to convert
 2000+ pages and hundreds of images to pdflatex. This bug concerns
 font pcrr7tn which is used in the pslatex-Style. The bold-face
 variant works fine.
 
Last remark about that bug. As pointed out by Ralf Stubner and as
already said by TE there is a quick workaround for that bug: simply
embedding that font (even if it is standard) into the ps file. This
can be done either by:

- feeding the option -Pdownload35 to dvips, or
- edit /etc/texmf/updmap.d/00*, change the line dvipsDownloadBase35 false
  to dvipsDownloadBase35 true, run update-updmap and updmap.

According to TE this workaround can have some negative side effects,
but in the moment I don't know, which.

Regards,
  Hilmar
-- 
sigmentation fault


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#293179: tetex-bin: Bug in font pcrr7tn with dvips: Backticks wrong

2005-04-13 Thread Hilmar Preusse 
On 08.04.05 Hilmar Preusse ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:

Hi all,

 Notes:
 - One may use t1diff[1] to show differences of the fonts
 - I tried to use that tool and got a ps file unfortunately gs was not
 able to process it.
 
 Regards,
   Hilmar
 
 [1]
 http://www.kammer.uni-hannover.de/~reinhard/texps/t1diff/t1diff.html
 
Ralf Stubner was so kind to send me a patch to be applied to t1diff.
After doing it, I should be possible to generate viewable Postscript
files.

Regards,
  Hilmar
-- 
sigmentation fault
--- t1diff  2003-04-27 16:13:57.0 +0200
+++ t1diff.new  2005-04-08 23:52:06.0 +0200
@@ -372,9 +372,8 @@
 
 open IN, $read_font_cmd| or die can't open $filename;
 while (IN) {
-   chop;
eval 's/\/' . $FontName . '/\/' . $alias . '/g';
-   print OUT $_\n;
+   print OUT $_;
 }
 close IN;
 print OUT \n;

Bug#293179: tetex-bin: Bug in font pcrr7tn with dvips: Backticks wrong

2005-04-08 Thread Hilmar Preusse 
forwarded 293179 http://bugs.ghostscript.com/show_bug.cgi?id=688022
reassign 293179 gsfonts
stop

On 01.02.05 Hans baier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:

Hi all,

 I use the pslatex package to print Linux Seminar courseware. This
 is heavily dependent on the correct rendering of backticks.
 
 The backticks are rendered correctly if viewed in xdvi or PDF
 generated by pdflatex, whereas they are rendered incorrectly when
 using dvips. Alas, I cant switch to pslatex because I would have to
 convert 2000+ pages and hundreds of images to pdflatex. This bug
 concerns font pcrr7tn which is used in the pslatex-Style. The
 bold-face variant works fine.
 
 This bug is reproducable:
 
 # cd /usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/base
 This is e-TeX, Version 3.14159-2.1 (Web2C 7.4.5)
 entering extended mode
 (./nfssfont.tex
 LaTeX2e 2001/06/01
 Babel v3.7h and hyphenation patterns for american, german, ngerman,
 nohyphena
 tion, loaded.
 (./article.cls
 Document Class: article 2001/04/21 v1.4e Standard LaTeX document class
 (./size10.clo))
 No auxiliary output files.
 
 **
 * NFSS font test program version v2.0e
 *
 * Follow the instructions
 **
 
 
 Name of the font to test = pcrr7tn
 Now type a test command (\help for help):)
 *\table
 
 *\punct
 
 *\bye
 [1]
 Output written on nfssfont.dvi (1 page, 7240 bytes).
 Transcript written on nfssfont.log.
 
 # dvips nfssfont.dvi
 # gv nfssfont.ps
 
  WRONG!
 
After a private discussion we came to the conclusion, that this is a
bug in the gsfonts package. xdvi uses the font ucrr8a.pfb to display
the char and gs uses the font n022003l.pfb to do that. These fonts
claim both to be NimbusMonL-Regu but that character (quoteleft)
differs significatly in both fonts.
I've forwarded that bug to upstream:
http://bugs.ghostscript.com/show_bug.cgi?id=688022
and now I'm reassigning to the related Debian package.
Notes:
- One may use t1diff[1] to show differences of the fonts
- I tried to use that tool and got a ps file unfortunately gs was not
able to process it.

Regards,
  Hilmar

[1]
http://www.kammer.uni-hannover.de/~reinhard/texps/t1diff/t1diff.html
-- 
sigmentation fault


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#293179: tetex-bin: Bug in font pcrr7tn with dvips: Backticks wrong

2005-02-19 Thread Hilmar Preusse 
On 02.02.05 Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
 Hans Baier [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:

Hi all,

 Can you send us an example where the backticks are incorrect?
 
  Your example nfssfont.ps is renderen incorrect  on my system.
 
 Just to make sure what we expect to see, and what we do see: The first
 line of the punctuation stuff reads:
 
 min, min: min; `min' ¿min? ¡min! (min) [min] min* min.
 
 (I hope the inverted ? and ! are encoded and displayed correctly in
 the e-mail).
 
 In the file out_powerpc.ps you sent me, I see instead
 
 min,min:min;`min'?`min?!`min!(min)[min]min*min.
 
 That is: The spaces are missing, the inverted ? is replaced by ?`,
 the inverteed ! by !`.
 
Well, I guess what Hans is speaking about is the following:

- create the dvi-file the way he described (pdflatex nfssfont and
  latex nfssfont [input as described in the report])
- dvips nfssfont
- rename nfssfont.ps to nfssfont1.ps
- ps2pdf nfssfont1.ps

now compare the dvi with the nfssfont.pdf (the look equally AFAICT).
Now take the nfssfont1.ps. You'll notice that the char 0x58 will look
differently. You'll see that too at the fourth string of the
punctuation test. The same difference occur, when I've converted the
ps into pdf.

Now the pdffonts output:

[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ pdffonts nfssfont.pdf
name type emb sub uni object ID
  --- --- --- -
TYDPHE+CMR7  Type 1   yes yes no   6  0
GSOYPH+CMR10 Type 1   yes yes no   9  0
ZGXXNR+CMTI10Type 1   yes yes no  12  0
EMGJUN+StandardSymL  Type 1   yes yes no  15  0
AGLIQY+CMTT10Type 1   yes yes no  18  0
FGPKKH+NimbusMonL-Regu-Extend_850Type 1   yes yes no  21  0
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ pdffonts nfssfont1.pdf
name type emb sub uni object ID
  --- --- --- -
ZM+FaType 1C  yes yes no  19  0
Courier  Type 1   no  no  no  17  0
Symbol   Type 1   no  no  no  16  0
GN+FdType 1C  yes yes no  15  0
HN+FeType 1C  yes yes no  13  0
IN+FfType 1C  yes yes no  11  0

Seem to bee completely different fonts used. I've performed my tests
using teTeX-2.99.10.20050123, but I guess it shouldn't make much
difference to 3.0.

I suggest to forward that to [tex-fonts] (I'm subsribed to that
list). As jack at scriptserver.homeunix.net already mentioned it is
probably a bug in tetex-base (or extra).

Kind Regards,
  Hilmar
-- 
sigmentation fault


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#293179: tetex-bin: Bug in font pcrr7tn with dvips: Backticks wrong

2005-02-02 Thread Frank Küster 
Dear Hans,

please keep the bugnumber address in the Cc, so that the mail gets
properly archived, and the other maintainers also see it.


Hans Baier [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:

The three files are at

http://people.debian.org/~frank/nfssfont.dvi
http://people.debian.org/~frank/nfssfont.ps
http://people.debian.org/~frank/nfssfont.pdf

if you want to have a look.

Can you send us an example where the backticks are incorrect?

 Your example nfssfont.ps is renderen incorrect  on my system.

Just to make sure what we expect to see, and what we do see: The first
line of the punctuation stuff reads:

min, min: min; `min' ¿min? ¡min! (min) [min] min* min.

(I hope the inverted ? and ! are encoded and displayed correctly in the
e-mail). 

In the file out_powerpc.ps you sent me, I see instead

min,min:min;`min'?`min?!`min!(min)[min]min*min.

That is: The spaces are missing, the inverted ? is replaced by ?`,
the inverteed ! by !`.

 Do I have to cleanup/reinstall fonts or something?

I'm not sure whether you already said this: If you generate a pdf file
from the buggy ps file, using ps2pdf, is the pdf file also buggy? If
yes, please send us the output of

pdffonts $filename.pdf

(the command is from xpdf-utils). 

Regards, Frank
-- 
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer

Bug#293179: tetex-bin: Bug in font pcrr7tn with dvips: Backticks wrong

2005-02-01 Thread Hans baier 
Package: tetex-bin
Version: 2.0.2-25
Severity: important

I use the pslatex package to print Linux Seminar courseware.
This is heavily dependent on the correct rendering of backticks.

The backticks are rendered correctly if viewed in xdvi
or PDF generated by pdflatex, whereas they are
rendered incorrectly when using dvips.
Alas, I cant switch to pslatex because I would have to convert
2000+ pages and hundreds of images to pdflatex.
This bug concerns font pcrr7tn which is used in the pslatex-Style.
The bold-face variant works fine.

This bug is reproducable:

# cd /usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/base
This is e-TeX, Version 3.14159-2.1 (Web2C 7.4.5)
entering extended mode
(./nfssfont.tex
LaTeX2e 2001/06/01
Babel v3.7h and hyphenation patterns for american, german, ngerman,
nohyphena
tion, loaded.
(./article.cls
Document Class: article 2001/04/21 v1.4e Standard LaTeX document class
(./size10.clo))
No auxiliary output files.

**
* NFSS font test program version v2.0e
*
* Follow the instructions
**


Name of the font to test = pcrr7tn
Now type a test command (\help for help):)
*\table

*\punct

*\bye
[1]
Output written on nfssfont.dvi (1 page, 7240 bytes).
Transcript written on nfssfont.log.

# dvips nfssfont.dvi
# gv nfssfont.ps

 WRONG!

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: powerpc (ppc)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.8-powerpc
Locale: LANG=de_DE, LC_CTYPE=de_DE (charmap=ISO-8859-1)

Versions of packages tetex-bin depends on:
ii  debconf  1.4.30.11   Debian configuration management sy
ii  debianutils  2.8.4   Miscellaneous utilities specific t
ii  dpkg 1.10.25 Package maintenance system for Deb
ii  ed   0.2-20  The classic unix line editor
ii  libc62.3.2.ds1-20GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii  libgcc1  1:3.4.3-6   GCC support library
ii  libice6  4.3.0.dfsg.1-10 Inter-Client Exchange library
ii  libkpathsea3 2.0.2-25path search library for teTeX (run
ii  libpaper11.1.14-3Library for handling paper charact
ii  libpng12-0   1.2.8rel-1  PNG library - runtime
ii  libsm6   4.3.0.dfsg.1-10 X Window System Session Management
ii  libstdc++5   1:3.3.5-5   The GNU Standard C++ Library v3
ii  libt1-5  5.0.2-3 Type 1 font rasterizer library - r
ii  libwww0  5.4.0-9 The W3C WWW library
ii  libx11-6 4.3.0.dfsg.1-10 X Window System protocol client li
ii  libxaw7  4.3.0.dfsg.1-10 X Athena widget set library
ii  libxext6 4.3.0.dfsg.1-10 X Window System miscellaneous exte
ii  libxmu6  4.3.0.dfsg.1-10 X Window System miscellaneous util
ii  libxt6   4.3.0.dfsg.1-10 X Toolkit Intrinsics
ii  mime-support 3.28-1  MIME files 'mime.types'  'mailcap
ii  perl 5.8.4-5 Larry Wall's Practical Extraction 
ii  sed  4.1.2-8 The GNU sed stream editor
ii  tetex-base   2.0.2c-3Basic library files of teTeX
ii  ucf  1.13Update Configuration File: preserv
ii  xlibs4.3.0.dfsg.1-10 X Keyboard Extension (XKB) configu
ii  zlib1g   1:1.2.2-3   compression library - runtime

-- debconf information:
* tetex-bin/upd_map: true
* tetex-bin/cnf_name:
* tetex-bin/fmtutil: true
  tetex-bin/fmtutil-failed:
* tetex-bin/userperm: false
* tetex-bin/texmf: true
  tetex-bin/updmap-failed:
* tetex-bin/hyphen: german[=austrian-alte_Rechtschreibung], 
ngerman[=naustrian-neue_Rechtschreibung]
  tetex-bin/oldcfg: true
* tetex-bin/use_debconf: true
* tetex-bin/groupname: users
* tetex-bin/groupperm: false
* tetex-bin/lsr-perms: true


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#293179: tetex-bin: Bug in font pcrr7tn with dvips: Backticks wrong

2005-02-01 Thread Frank Küster 
Hans baier [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:

 Package: tetex-bin
 Version: 2.0.2-25
 Severity: important

 I use the pslatex package to print Linux Seminar courseware.
 This is heavily dependent on the correct rendering of backticks.

 The backticks are rendered correctly if viewed in xdvi
 or PDF generated by pdflatex, whereas they are
 rendered incorrectly when using dvips.

I followed the procedure you gave, and I cannot see a significant
difference between the xdvi and gv display. The little difference I see
is probably due to different rendering. When I compare the result of

latex nfssfont; dvips nfssfont.dvi; gv nfssfont.ps 

to 

pdflatex nfssfont; gv nfssfont.pdf 

I see no difference at all. 

The three files are at

http://people.debian.org/~frank/nfssfont.dvi
http://people.debian.org/~frank/nfssfont.ps
http://people.debian.org/~frank/nfssfont.pdf

if you want to have a look.

Can you send us an example where the backticks are incorrect?

Regards, Frank
-- 
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer